Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 202
  1. #41
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus EsotericReverie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Sweden (Göteborg)
    Posts
    3,191
    Yeah, that has been brought up as suggested reading before. By MrEclectic. It's very good and well written, but it's just so bloody long. I haven't found the energy to go through all of it, and I'm one of the "hard-core tactics crew". Will have to take the time some day, or maybe as he suggests himself, a little at a time.

    It could be very useful for the tactical crew but I'm guessing much of it is going to work so-so in an organisation as loose as ours is, outside of the very best of our TACGIR sessions. Also, in the chaos that is Planetside 2.

    A good catch either way, and it should probably be linked from our outfit guide?

  2. #42
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus MrEclectic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,095
    I've posted this before, but I think it covers the absolute basics. It's an ArmAIII traileir by dslyexci:



    Some of it are specific to ArmAIII, but the principles described in the video are applicable in Planetside 2 as well.

    tl;dw: Call out enemy presence and movement consicely, maintain cohesion and perimeter security, slice the pie, watch lines of fire, mouse discipline

  3. #43
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,588
    And we get outmaneuvered again and again by teams that are not quite so disciplined, but able to respond much quicker, and realize that death in this game is pretty trivial (in contrast to say, ARMA where it is a disaster).

    Don't get me wrong Eclectic, I think we can and should work better as teams. I just don't think the stuff you keep harping on about is the way to go. Not only would it take hours and hours of practice where most of our members would rather be playing the actual game (remember you play this game much, much more than anyone else in the outfit - more than twice most of the leadership corp, about 20 times our average member), but it's also fussing about a lot of things that aren't so important. Death as infantry is pretty trivial in PS2. As a consequence, suppression is pretty ineffective with anything other than explosives. Infantry weapons pretty much go from very fast kill to completely ineffective over a very small range space, which rather limits viable overwatch tactics.

    What we need to work on more is simply staying together rather than single-person streaming, and getting people to watch all approaches, rather than all staring at the most likley approach. This gets at its worst when all of RPS crowds around a spawn and get themselves shot from shields.

  4. #44
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus MrEclectic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by CMaster View Post
    And we get outmaneuvered again and again by teams that are not quite so disciplined, but able to respond much quicker, and realize that death in this game is pretty trivial (in contrast to say, ARMA where it is a disaster).

    Don't get me wrong Eclectic, I think we can and should work better as teams. I just don't think the stuff you keep harping on about is the way to go. Not only would it take hours and hours of practice where most of our members would rather be playing the actual game (remember you play this game much, much more than anyone else in the outfit - more than twice most of the leadership corp, about 20 times our average member), but it's also fussing about a lot of things that aren't so important. Death as infantry is pretty trivial in PS2. As a consequence, suppression is pretty ineffective with anything other than explosives. Infantry weapons pretty much go from very fast kill to completely ineffective over a very small range space, which rather limits viable overwatch tactics.

    What we need to work on more is simply staying together rather than single-person streaming, and getting people to watch all approaches, rather than all staring at the most likley approach. This gets at its worst when all of RPS crowds around a spawn and get themselves shot from shields.
    Actually I agree with you. I've been thinking that I'm not expressing myself clearly and perhaps contributing to the confusion. What I've been asking for are just what you describe: call out enemies, watch each other's back, cover all appertures and approaches, move together, but not bunched up, and try to be a bit more creative. Anything beyond that and it becomes unwieldy. Just the points covered in that video, but adapted into Planetside2. And one more thing: a bit slower pacing. Just reacting and rushing into a situation usually does not work.

    So, for instance, friendly fire is usually a non-issue. Calling out though tactical grenades, such as concussion or flashbangs, notifies people to stay out of the initial blast and then move in fast. Calling out every step you take is noise. Calling out enemy contacts, especially those coming from a new direction, is vital. Avoiding sprinting makes no sense, there is no fatigue. Rushing without checking through doorways and around corners equally makes no sense, as people have perfected ambushing with a shotgun into an art form.

    As for suppression: it kind of works, kind of doesn't. It's more of a warning that if you keep trying that particular approach, you'll not do much beyond keep dying. And inexperienced players seem to be afraid of dying. Usually that gets them killed.

    My point is, that I for one do not want a mil-sim outfit. Just some basic stuff, so we work as a team. Links such as the above are just points that already work, collected in a concise manner. A lot of it are not applicable in our case. But the principles are.
    Last edited by MrEclectic; 29-05-2013 at 09:48 AM.

  5. #45
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus MrEclectic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by CMaster View Post
    And we get outmaneuvered again and again by teams that are not quite so disciplined, but able to respond much quicker, and realize that death in this game is pretty trivial (in contrast to say, ARMA where it is a disaster).
    Just one thing though: most of our opponents are coordinated, at least more than us. And if they are not, they call in someone who is. Point being, they have improved their rapid response and unit cohesion.
    Last edited by MrEclectic; 29-05-2013 at 09:57 AM.

  6. #46
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus EsotericReverie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Sweden (Göteborg)
    Posts
    3,191
    We noticed this last bit in practice yesterday with the MAX squad. We had a base under wraps, kept the TR contained in the spawn room, until BRTD showed up with about 2 squads, dropping behind us and coming out of the spawn room at the same time, totally wiping us out in just about 15 seconds. Pulling that kind of trick off more often is a worthy ambition, I think.

    Don't get me wrong, we often do similar things, but mostly just with strength of numbers, not so often by great coordination.

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by CMaster View Post
    And we get outmaneuvered again and again by teams that are not quite so disciplined, but able to respond much quicker, and realize that death in this game is pretty trivial (in contrast to say, ARMA where it is a disaster).

    What we need to work on more is simply staying together rather than single-person streaming, and getting people to watch all approaches, rather than all staring at the most likley approach. This gets at its worst when all of RPS crowds around a spawn and get themselves shot from shields.
    You can adapt some things, but most are actually common sense. Don't bunch up, spread out, don't walk where someone is firing, etc.
    The squads in PS2 are quite large, and you could easily split them up into fire-teams of 4 or 6. You have one guy in charge of each team that makes sure all his members are present with him. That way when you direct people over the field you can simply state that fireteam 1 moves to position x and fireteam 2 covers them. Instead of the SL micromanaging every squadmember, you have an extra guy that does that. This can improve how much we stay together and thus increase rapid response.

  8. #48
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,588
    We've tried fire teams before.

    They're good in some situations, but mostly they are far too small. I know 12 seems like a lot, but in the context of PS2, where ~100 people fighting over a single tower is pretty typical, and big fights are 300-500, and a single person with a shotgun can lear 5 people from a room on less seconds (I manage that often enough and I'm far from the best) there's very few tasks - even holding a small location - that you can reasonably entrust to half a squad.

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by CMaster View Post
    We've tried fire teams before.

    They're good in some situations, but mostly they are far too small. I know 12 seems like a lot, but in the context of PS2, where ~100 people fighting over a single tower is pretty typical, and big fights are 300-500, and a single person with a shotgun can lear 5 people from a room on less seconds (I manage that often enough and I'm far from the best) there's very few tasks - even holding a small location - that you can reasonably entrust to half a squad.
    To clarify I wasn't exactly talking about entrusting them objectives of their own, the covering example was in my head moving between two close-by buildings where it would be great to have some cover and not everyone moving at the same time. What they can be used is to more easily assure that certain parts are covered. If one squad is holding and objective then you can have one team covering one door and the second being covered by the other team. If you phrase orders ambiguously then I find that you rarely get a response, but if you give direct orders people are more likely to comply instantly. The whole process would go from "I need half of you to cover each door" to "FT1 covers that door, FT2 covers that". Just a simplified process really, as well as the bonus of perhaps sticking people together more.
    The squad itself would move cohesively and when required in unison with other squads. It is just a matter of instead of giving quite a few specific orders or one not specific, you give few specific orders to achieve the same goal.

    I'm just going to try it out when I SL the next time
    Last edited by Agemman; 29-05-2013 at 10:37 AM.

  10. #50
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,012
    The fire team stuff we actually already do a bit. It tends to be phrased as '1-6, advance on the point, 7-12 cover them' and the 'fire team' isn't permanent. Guess this has the advantage of being immediately understandable for someone who has just logged on with no extra explanation and can be adapted on the fly for less than full squad numbers.

    Think we tried 'odds and evens' before as well, but as anyone that has watched this knows it is unnecessarily confusing.
    Last edited by Rizlar; 29-05-2013 at 10:48 AM.

  11. #51
    Network Hub
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    225
    Something to keep in mind that turns most tactics on their head is that due to how the netcode works, an attacker rounding a door has 100-300ms in which to shoot the defender before they even appear on the defender's screen.

    The other big issue with tactical combat is that we very, very rarely get in an even fight where we constitute the majority of the allied force. We're either in a massively imbalanced fight, in which intra-squad tactics don't matter, or we're in an even fight but as small part of a much larger zerg, in which case again squad tactics beyond "stay together" don't matter.

    e: Case in point, when we fight BRTD and the other big organized TR outfits. Our losses to them are almost always because we're either outnumbered or they've pulled a shitload of MAXes/armour/air on us. Our wins are almost always when we outnumber them or we've pulled a shitload of MAXes/armour on them. Making greater use of those force multipliers is what we should be focusing on, not squad-level organization. The ideal in my mind is a MAX crash every 10 minutes and an armour rush every 20.

    @Eclectic: all the calling targets stuff would be great if PS2 allowed players to point at things, or if we used proximity-based chat. It doesn't though, and we don't, so 12 people calling targets quickly turns into an absolute shitfest of "HE'S OVER THERE!!!" at one extreme and the far-too-long "northwest-ish of the building next to cap point A at indar excavation" at the other.
    Last edited by cfftble; 29-05-2013 at 11:38 AM.

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Rizlar View Post
    The fire team stuff we actually already do a bit. It tends to be phrased as '1-6, advance on the point, 7-12 cover them' and the 'fire team' isn't permanent. Guess this has the advantage of being immediately understandable for someone who has just logged on with no extra explanation and can be adapted on the fly for less than full squad numbers.

    Think we tried 'odds and evens' before as well, but as anyone that has watched this knows it is unnecessarily confusing.
    Using 1-6 and 7-12 was pretty much what I was thinking of using. I haven't encountered it so far, but I have only played with you all two times so that might be the reason.
    PS2 Ingame: Agenious
    Mumble: Age


  13. #53
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus EsotericReverie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Sweden (Göteborg)
    Posts
    3,191
    That said, CMaster, I'd like to try it again sometime. We've come quite a bit on the tactics and discipline side. It might work better this time. Also, I wasn't present when fire teams were trialled the first time around, so it would be fun to give it another go.

  14. #54
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus MrEclectic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,095
    Quote Originally Posted by cfftble View Post
    Something to keep in mind that turns most tactics on their head is that due to how the netcode works, an attacker rounding a door has 100-300ms in which to shoot the defender before they even appear on the defender's screen.
    I know, that is why "slicing the pie" works especially well. Most of my kills are by approaching a corner, and starting to "slice the pie" a bit behind the corner, so I can scan the other side and fire immediately. Also, that fact is relevant mostly to twitch players. Most of us are not.

    Quote Originally Posted by cfftble View Post
    The other big issue with tactical combat is that we very, very rarely get in an even fight where we constitute the majority of the allied force. We're either in a massively imbalanced fight, in which intra-squad tactics don't matter, or we're in an even fight but as small part of a much larger zerg, in which case again squad tactics beyond "stay together" don't matter.
    Disagree. We have used intra-squad and inter-squad coordination to great effect. We've even dropped at the Bastion once, to practice a tower capture drill, and held it against double the forces, just for fun, until they MAX-crashed A.

    Tactics don't work because we don't put the effort in. It's a viscious circle.

    Quote Originally Posted by cfftble View Post
    e: Case in point, when we fight BRTD and the other big organized TR outfits. Our losses to them are almost always because we're either outnumbered or they've pulled a shitload of MAXes/armour/air on us. Our wins are almost always when we outnumber them or we've pulled a shitload of MAXes/armour on them. Making greater use of those force multipliers is what we should be focusing on, not squad-level organization. The ideal in my mind is a MAX crash every 10 minutes and an armour rush every 20.
    That is a tactic. In order to work it requires that people gather up at the rally point with the appropriate mix of classes and vehicles, stick together, and approach the enemy from an advantageous direction.

    The thing is though, that we are terrible even at MAX crashes. Everyone just piles in through a single door. And gets farmed, if there is a semi-decent defense in there. And as for armour, let's see what the TR are doing: they bring in armour, and still have infantry with AV weapons and snipers covering the tank column. We usually all pull armour, pile in, the armour gets blown up, and then back in as infantry. See a pattern?

    Quote Originally Posted by cfftble View Post
    @Eclectic: all the calling targets stuff would be great if PS2 allowed players to point at things, or if we used proximity-based chat. It doesn't though, and we don't, so 12 people calling targets quickly turns into an absolute shitfest of "HE'S OVER THERE!!!" at one extreme and the far-too-long "northwest-ish of the building next to cap point A at indar excavation" at the other.
    Actually, it works and has worked. Especially on the beginning, even though we were casual. Somehow, we managed to call out enemy movements. Not all of them, just the most relevant. Also, as I've written, don't call out everything, just call out enemy movements from new directions. We don't need to fill the comms, but we need to call out when the enemy appears suddenly from an unexpected angle. I'm fed up of getting shot in the back, as an enemy squad is rushing in, because noone called it out. It is a fucking squad, they already killed one squad of ours and are halfway across the base or building, perhaps that is a relevant piece of information? It is in the recent months that any and all use of call outs is steadily diclining, along with the outfit's average KDR and our success on the field. Correlation does not mean causation, but I'd guess that it's worth investigating.

    Also, on several occasions we've missed opportunities to outflank or outmaneuver the enemy, because noone is calling out, noone is paying attention to call outs, and if we somehow do, it is usually too late. We suffer from tunnel vision, and I actually believe that it is only logical. We have information about only what goes on right before our eyes, not the overall field and how the battle goes. So of course we stick to attacking from just a single and after a while predictable direction.

    I don't want mil-sim, just some basic team work. We are a team. If we don't use cover properly, don't cover each other, and don't communicate with each other, what is the point?
    Last edited by MrEclectic; 29-05-2013 at 01:27 PM.

  15. #55
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2,012
    What Eclectic said. It is more about good habits than micro-management.

    Call outs can and should be succinct and effective, we just need to get everyone into the habit of using them well. I try and limit it to a NSEW direction relative to the base we are fighting over or an obvious landmark, eg. 'Prowler incoming NE' or 'infantry south of A'.

  16. #56
    Network Hub Skhalt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Lille, France
    Posts
    212
    Quote Originally Posted by MrEclectic View Post
    And as for armour, let's see what the TR are doing: they bring in armour, and still have infantry with AV weapons and snipers covering the tank column. We usually all pull armour, pile in, the armour gets blown up, and then back in as infantry. See a pattern?
    The "whole or nothing" style certainly is a real problem, and has become a bit of a signature since that's basically what has been first remarked to me by several people (ex-LFS for some) who played with us during CtAs and a couple other times. The "everybody to warpgate and in a gal!" and "everybody in mags!" moves strike everyone else than us as a bit silly. Not exactly the first time we say we're bad at combined arms, but for some reason we aren't exactly trying either.

  17. #57
    Network Hub Cei's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    421
    I think the problem with "everybody back to WG and get in a whale" is that it means the entire of RPS is off the battle field, back at the warp gate, for anything up to ten minutes as we essentially piss around waiting for people to respawn and dawdle over to a whale. In that time, plenty of capping and reinforcing can happen, meaning the drop has to then re-take the entire place.

    Instead, it should be done smartly. 3 squads in a firefight? Send a single one back to the gate to grab a whale, whilst the other two hold ground. Same goes for an armour push.

  18. #58
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,588
    Quote Originally Posted by Skhalt View Post
    The "whole or nothing" style certainly is a real problem, and has become a bit of a signature since that's basically what has been first remarked to me by several people (ex-LFS for some) who played with us during CtAs and a couple other times. The "everybody to warpgate and in a gal!" and "everybody in mags!" moves strike everyone else than us as a bit silly. Not exactly the first time we say we're bad at combined arms, but for some reason we aren't exactly trying either.
    Everybody in gals often makes sense.
    If you're gal dropping you want to be doing so in superior numbers. Equally, it's often done because we're moving across the map.
    If it's taking too long, well, th PL should be on top of that.

    Everybody in armour less so. I've often tried as PL to ask individual squads to pull armour (when in split comms, in joint comms I'll ask for some volunteers). During CTA, yes, entire platoons were asked to pull armour - but they were always used in conjunction with inf platoons. However I've not seen many other PLs do this (or once, we were asked to pull armour, then asked to gal drop immediately after). Also, I only actually get that armour squad about 60% of the time. Rest of the time, there's a couple of lightnings that quickly die, then back to straggly inf.

  19. #59
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus MrEclectic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,095
    It all boils down to lack of teamwork. We don't cover each other as infantry, so how can we do that in armour or aircraft, when it is even more difficult? We don't cover even different angles of a building, so how can we approach a battlefield from different flanks, in a mix of infantry and vehicles? We don't communicate even the most basic information, so how can we follow orders or make plans?

  20. #60
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus MrEclectic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,095
    As food for thought, not something we should try to emulate. Perhaps take some basic, good pieces of advice from:

    Death Watch Gaming Grunt Manual

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •